I think some students are good test takers and others arn't. I don't think standardized tests should be used against such students that don't perform well on them. I know plenty of smart kids who just don't perform on these types of tests. In some ways I think society has created such a strong opinion on how tests make up your intelligence level, because they basically get you into college. The importance of these tests is not over rated, but I think that there are other ways to see how well a student does in school, other then tests.
2007-03-13 10:23:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Katie D 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Its no longer that i'm adverse to standardized testing, i basically imagine that the way its set up is awful. They take the exams about 3/4 by the school year, meaning they ought to squash an finished year's curriculum into that 3/4, and then for some thing else of the year there is not any new fabric for them to hide. the way the finished issue is determined up is awful, the conception isn't. - And to operate, in some places ( no longer particular if its all places ) college funding is in accordance to how nicely they do on those exams, giving instructors an incentive to in undemanding words hide what's on the standardized attempt, which oftentimes isn't whats best for the student. This also signifies that the brightest scholars are often held back because the school receives no take advantage of having a pupil that is universal with more beneficial than what's on the standardized exams - And back, what i have got here across is that the attempt ( in California, the action picture star attempt, ) would not straight away impression the student's grade, or everlasting list, basically college funding, so scholars oftentimes basically blow off the attempt, do not truly attempt, and finally end up screwing up their college. - And back, they cram the finished year's testing into per week's worth of immediately effervescent in little circles, and this begins at 2d grade. With hyperactive little young ones, getting them to sit down in a seat for per week immediately, 6 hours an afternoon isn't the way you get the finest outcomes. the topics with the testing equipment on the prompt bypass on and on, no infant left in the back of ( which presented about a lot of this replace ) replaced right into a foul idea, and the finished issue needs reform.
2016-12-01 22:59:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by meran 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm taking the GEPA this week. I thought the Science section was difficult, but the Math was VERY easy. I agree that by scoring advanced proficient on the GEPA you are doing nothing but showing off your school. Although, if you fail, you are in basic skills classes in high school... no matter what. I think that's a lot of pressure on the students. I'm a very smart student, and I'm terrified that I failed the Science section. Some people are very smart, but aren't good at tests, like me. I think that it is unfair for one test to determine a student's future.
2007-03-13 14:09:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by ♫Ҝάŧίέ♥ 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, "testing"(in one variety or another) is a necessary part of school, mostly because it creates basic expectations for the performance of teachers and students.
But by definition, "Standardized" tests can only cover skills that can be *easily written down*, particularlly: math, science, and language. These are important skills, but if the only things that children were taught in school where math, science, and language, then the school district really would be wasting it's money.
This has always been the trend in public schools, especially recently. That is, focusing on science, math and literacy, while neglecting much more well rounded programs in fine arts, performing arts, applied learning, practical and life skills, etc, where "student success" is much harder to measure.
It is a real tragedy how much the government spends on military and law enforcement, compared to how little it spends on education....
Good luck on your test BTW, just try to take your time, and answer as best as you can.
~Donkey Hotei.
2007-03-13 10:57:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by WOMBAT, Manliness Expert 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that they put way to much pressure on todays youth with all these tests. They also put to much weight on it I mean in some cases you don't past the standardized test you don't go to the next grade or graduate. They don't take into consideration that some people are just bad test takers.
2007-03-13 10:27:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by onlyoneshea 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Standardized tests should be done away with altogether! Why not look at what really matters? How well the student performed academically in the years prior to applying for college entrance?
2007-03-13 10:26:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by cloverivy 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
While test results definitely DO reflect how good schools are, I also think that standardized tests are a necessary (and efficient) way to measure and compare how much students from different areas know....since they're "standardized".
A student in California who gets an "A" in a history class may not know as much (or may know more) as an "A" student in New York. A standardized test attempts to measure those students on common ground.
2007-03-13 10:22:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by rastabudd 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
I didn't like them.
Teachers ended up focusing too much on teaching towards what would be on the standardized test instead of just teaching.
2007-03-13 11:57:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Standardization of tests would be marginally relevant if there was standardization of curriculum. Failing that, such tests can only indicate deficiencies that may be difficult for a student to overcome.
2007-03-13 10:22:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by fredrick z 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I hate them too (I like the one my school's giving the sophomores - HS: the Ohio Graduation Test), but that's only because the non-sophomores get to start late.
2007-03-13 14:32:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by the Politics of Pikachu 7
·
0⤊
0⤋